Feingold: Change Constitution to end Senate appointments

[The Senator]

I find term limits to be undemocratic. If the people want a specific person to continue serving them, and if the politician wants to continue serving, then there should be no problem. It's undemocratic to restrict a law abiding person from office and it's undemocratic to not follow the desires of the people. After all, isn't democracy about listening to the will of the people?

Exactly.

 

[SuBe]

So you'd want John McCain out on the street?

He doesn't run for ReElection until next year.

 

[SuBe]

I think they should throw out the 17th Amendment. The Senators are supposed to Represent the States Interest, and the House of Representatives are supposed to REPRESTENT the People. No State has any Representation in Congress.

This is a Terrible suggestion.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Even though Senators are now elected by the people, they still serve the overall interests of their particular state. Representatives represent a particular constituency of a state, not the interests of the whole state like a Senator.

 

[Metamorpho1977]

Since the constitution is a dead document. Changing anything in it would be like writing on the bathroom wall. Lots of people read it, but no one cares what it says.

 

[SuBe]

Even though Senators are now elected by the people, they still serve the overall interests of their particular state. Representatives represent a particular constituency of a state, not the interests of the whole state like a Senator.

But they don't, they work to get votes from the Public, not the nomination of the States. They are, or should be like, the UN Ambassador. The UN Ambassodor doesn't care to get votes, just like a Senator should care to get votes.

 

[The Senator]

If anyone dared to tell me that Chuck Schumer, for example, didn't base his legislative decisions on what was in the best interest of New York state, I would laugh in their faces and walk away from the conversation shaking my head.

 

[SuBe]

If anyone dared to tell me that Chuck Schumer, for example, didn't base his legislative decisions on what was in the best interest of New York state, I would laugh in their faces and walk away from the conversation shaking my head.

Would you laugh at their face if they said that they base some if not all of their Decisions on what will get them re-elected?

 

[Nitehawk013]

I think Reps, Senators, Governors, Presidents, etc stopped caring much for what the peopel want or what is best for the constituancy about the same time they became incredibly well paid careers ensuring they would never have to get a real job in the real world again. Their salary and benefits are solid for life as long as they push through legislation that benefits them rather than the people.

 

[The Senator]

Would you laugh at their face if they said that they base some if not all of their Decisions on what will get them re-elected?

Ah, but if someone bases a decision on what will get them re-elected, is that not a vote in the interest of the constituency and, ultimately, the state?

 

[SuBe]

Ah, but if someone bases a decision on what will get them re-elected, is that not a vote in the interest of the constituency and, ultimately, the state?

Good question, but what if it is not a popular decision? But, still good for the State?

How about this, why would the Founding Fathers want it any other way, when the House is supposed to represent the people? Why didn't they write it into the Constitution to have the State Senators get elected instead of Nomination/Appointed?

 

[The Senator]

Good question, but what if it is not a popular decision? But, still good for the State?

How about this, why would the Founding Fathers want it any other way, when the House is supposed to represent the people? Why didn't they write it into the Constitution to have the State Senators get elected instead of Nomination/Appointed?

Why do we put the Founding Fathers on a pedestal and act as if they are godlike in everything they have done? The Founding Fathers had a narrow view of how the government should work. Even they knew this, hence the provisions set forth which made this a "living" document malleable to societal change. They could not have possibly foreseen how society would have evolved over time, and as society changed, the need for direct election of Senators became much more apparent. The reason why we have direct elections now is because corruption was so rampant in senate appointments by the state legislature that the American public felt that the process needed to be more democratic. And now, we see that corruption and nepotism is running rampant in gubernatorial appointments to fill vacancies, and that every decision to appoint someone to fill a senate seat is driven by pure politics.

And yes... members of Congress have made unpopular decisions which went against the will of those in their district and state... it actually happens quite frequently...

 

[SuBe]

Why do we put the Founding Fathers on a pedestal and act as if they are godlike in everything they have done?

Because they were more Learned and educated what will ultimatly happen when the State opresses the people than anyone today.

The Founding Fathers had a narrow view of how the government should work. Even they knew this, hence the provisions set forth which made this a "living" document malleable to societal change.

I don't believe it's a "Living" Document. That's like playing Poker and you change the rules midgame. Instead of the Rules being written in Stone, we can change them willy-nilly? According to how we feel? No, our Rights are grounding and not up to interpertation. I KNOW I have Freedom of Speech, I KNOW I have a right to Due Process, I KNOW I have a Right to Not Quarter anyone without my consent, I KNOW I have a Right to anything in the Bill of Rights. Does this change with the times too?

They could not have possibly foreseen how society would have evolved over time, and as society changed, the need for direct election of Senators became much more apparent. The reason why we have direct elections now is because corruption was so rampant in senate appointments by the state legislature that the American public felt that the process needed to be more democratic. And now, we see that corruption and nepotism is running rampant in gubernatorial appointments to fill vacancies, and that every decision to appoint someone to fill a senate seat is driven by pure politics.

And yes... members of Congress have made unpopular decisions which went against the will of those in their district and state... it actually happens quite frequently...

I know it happens from time to time. But in General, they have to worry about getting re-elected, and that takes away from their duties.

 

[The Senator]

So, basically, you believe that several dozen men knew anything and everything there is to know about life, and that every generation which follows should bow to the apparent wisdom without question, without being able to change what came before us because their brilliance is the example of sheer magnanimity? Is that in itself not tyranny? That we should all be expected to fall in line based on words written by ordinary men two hundred and thirty-two years ago?

I'm sure African Americans would have greatly appreciated the Constitution if it were to never change... same thing with women...

 

[Malice]

I think SuBe means this:
He believes in the Constitution. Its a document made to grow with time.
But the core values, freedom of speech, weapons ...all that are non-negotiable for the most part.

I am sure people can find holes in my belief...but you know, its hard to write something like this without writing pages...

 

[SuBe]

So, basically, you believe that several dozen men knew anything and everything there is to know about life, and that every generation which follows should bow to the apparent wisdom without question, without being able to change what came before us because their brilliance is the example of sheer magnanimity? Is that in itself not tyranny? That we should all be expected to fall in line based on words written by ordinary men two hundred and thirty-two years ago?

I'm sure African Americans would have greatly appreciated the Constitution if it were to never change... same thing with women...

The Constitution didn't Condone or Legalize Slavery, or Women Rights being infringed. You should know that Jman. Especially if you read the thing.

The Bill of Rights are basic Rights, of course you can grow from it, but that doesn't mean that Rights Change from day to day. Those things are infallible. You always have the Right to Life, Liberty and your Property. That is it. Each of the Right laid out in the Bill of Rights just explain different Variations of your Right to Life, Liberty and Property.

 

[SuBe]

I think SuBe means this:
He believes in the Constitution. Its a document made to grow with time.
But the core values, freedom of speech, weapons ...all that are non-negotiable for the most part.

I am sure people can find holes in my belief...but you know, its hard to write something like this without writing pages...

That is exaclty what I mean.

Why is there a Right to Bear Arms? Or a Right to Free Speech, what are the Purposes of these things? Just to fill words on a Document? No, they are their for Specific reasons. All reasons learn through bloodshed and ashes.

 

[Metamorpho1977]

The Constitution also doesn't guarantee anyone the right to vote. There are provisions to prevent anyone from keeping anyone from voting. But, there isn't any specific right to vote mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

 

[SuBe]

The Constitution also doesn't guarantee anyone the right to vote. There are provisions to prevent anyone from keeping anyone from voting. But, there isn't any specific right to vote mentioned anywhere in the constitution.

That is true, or why else would the Supreme Court say in "Bush Vs Gore, 2000" that it didn't exist, or even why would Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. try to push a Constitutional Amendment adding the Right to Vote to the Constitution?

I'm adding that in there to help you, I've had this debate before, and there are plenty of people here that will argue with you until you are blue in the face.

 

[Metamorpho1977]

Which is why I say the Constitution is a dead document. Absolutely nothing our government does now is in line with anything in the whole document. Read Neal Boortz' Somebody's Gotta Say It.

 

[dnno1]

Good luck trying to change the Constitution for that.

 

[SuBe]

Which is why I say the Constitution is a dead document. Absolutely nothing our government does now is in line with anything in the whole document. Read Neal Boortz' Somebody's Gotta Say It.

Beat you too it, and have it signed.

 

[SuBe]

Good luck trying to change the Constitution for that.

Change it for what, to add the Right to Vote?

 

[Metamorpho1977]

Beat you too it, and have it signed.

Now, some things in the book, I have a hard time agreeing with, but for the most part, he's right on the money.

 

[SuBe]

Now, some things in the book, I have a hard time agreeing with, but for the most part, he's right on the money.

So, you have also read the FairTax Books?